Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We’d be happy to provide the ’09–10 list of identified maintenance for communities, all the communities, to the committee again.

Another school in my riding, since we are dealing with Education, Culture and Employment, is the Paul Niditchie School in Tsiigehtchic. It has a joint community hall/small gymnasium, which is attached to the school and used for both purposes: as a community hall and by the school for recreation. It is having some major piling problems that just came to light the last time we were there for a meeting a couple of weeks back.

That building was going to be condemned before we even had our public meeting there that day. I’m just wondering exactly what we are doing to ensure

inspections to ensure that we have safe facilities for our students to go to school in and the public to use as community halls or community recreation activities.

I think, again, the government’s so called number one priority is public safety. We’re being told to have pride in our community. Well, we may not have to meet in that facility because it’s been classified as unsafe since the pilings under it have deteriorated and they just found out about it.

So how often are these inspections — assessments and evaluations — done to ensure the protection of people and the students in those schools is priority number one?

Mr. Chair, I’d ask if I could defer that question to Mr. Aumond.

Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Minister Aumond.

I’d like to know exactly — looking at the five year, ten year, 15 year capital plans — where there are going to be major improvements on the existing schools. I’ll use my riding, for instance, in regard to either replacement upgrades or total replacement. I know the Moose Kerr School is scheduled for 2014–15, but I probably won’t be here.

I think it’s important that the community is aware that you can cope only so long. I think there is a point when communities want to know they are not going to be delayed, delayed, delayed to a point where they have to condemn schools or shut schools down because of specific electrical code violations — things that should basically not get to that point where we have to deal with this major infrastructure, especially schools in our communities.

The reason we have instituted the deferred maintenance program is to try to address some of the backlog of the maintenance issues. We have also done assessments of a significant number of major facilities that we own. I think the offer has already been made to share with committee. The Premier as well has indicated that he is prepared to sit down and look at all that new information with the current 20 year needs assessment. Plus we’ll — just so we

have a more comprehensive view — provide the ten year retrospective as well. As we move through the capital planning process, as it moves forward from this particular forum on to the next year, we’ll have all that information before us.

Last question, Mr. Chair. One of the issues that always comes up is the whole environmental condition of our schools. Especially with old schools, such as the Moose Kerr School, we have a lot of products used that are no longer classified by way of lead paint, different types of insulation.

I know this issue has come up with what has happened to SAM school in Inuvik and other schools because of environmental contamination by air circulating systems. Again it comes down to a question of not only the safety of the children but also the safety of the teachers who work in this facility and ensuring the safety and health of the people in those facilities, that they’re working in a healthy and safe environment. I’d like to ask: how often do we do assessments of quality of air in the schools throughout the Northwest Territories?

At this point we do them on an as required basis or where it’s anticipated there may be a problem so that we can clarify whether there is or not.

I know from personal experience that we have had public safety officers with the Workers’ Safety and Compensation Commission called in by either the teachers or the principals where we had a backup of the sewer system. You had, basically, a puncture of a ceiling; they see something seeping out of the walls.

In order to get attention to this problem, it seems like it has to go public, and I don’t think that should be the case. If we as the government are responsible for the quality and the safety of our residents, and more importantly the children in our schools, this should be an assessment process that’s always paramount to ensure the health and well-being of our students and our teachers in the work environment they go to five days a week over seven or eight months of the year.

It’s something I’ve for a fact had to deal with in schools in my riding because of the things I mentioned — backup of a sewer system, where basically you have a punctured or frozen line or something, and it starts leaking out of mechanical equipment in the mechanic room. These things are crucial. They could shut down our infrastructure. We must do whatever we can to find ways to make sure the schools are constructed with safe building materials and, if not, those materials are removed or remediated so we do have healthy schools for our students to go to.

I appreciate the Member’s concern. If there are events that trigger a concern, like a sewer backup or those types of things, and there are questions about quality of air, clearly there are ways we can deal with that with Public Health or Environment.

In terms of these building standards we do our repairs as we bring things up to code. New construction must meet the building code. We have our northern building standards, as well, to try to make them as energy efficient as possible, as the deputy indicated here yesterday when talking about some of the quality of the energy ratings in some of our new buildings.

Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Next on my list is Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to add a few comments to the discussion. I’ve got a few questions as well.

Like many other Members, I’m supportive of the Inuvik school replacement. I have been for a number of years now, since the roof collapsed in 2004, and there’s a need there to replace that piece of infrastructure.

The interesting thing for me, though, is that if it was in the private sector and they needed to replace a piece of infrastructure like this — it’s a big building — it’d be done in the most timely, cost efficient, effective manner possible. What I’m seeing with this project is that if you follow the timeline back a ways, it’s had so many people involved in it, so many design changes, and time equals money, Mr. Chairman. I think it’s cost the government a tremendous amount of dollars even to get to the stage where we’re looking at a negotiation with a contractor to get the school built.

I guess the first question I would have is: why is it taking so long, an inordinate amount of time? If the agreement letter was out in July — it’s almost the middle of October — when are we going to have a deal signed so we can proceed with construction of the Inuvik school’s replacement?

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Aumond.

I can understand, and I appreciate my colleague Mr. Yakeleya when he talks about the $400,000 that the community of Tulita put into their school. Tulita is not alone. There are other examples across the territory. Here in Yellowknife, for example, is the Weledeh/St. Patrick’s gym. I

was a city councillor when the City of Yellowknife put $1 million into that project to enhance a community asset. Is the Town of Inuvik putting any money into the new school, or have they had that discussion? I think when we’re talking fairness here, if there are enhancements at that school and there are things the community wants in there, we’ve got a precedent that’s been set across the territory for capital projects where communities, if need be, have to step up to the plate. I’m wondering: have any of those types of discussions taken place with the Town of Inuvik?

Again, I think those are discussions that should happen. If there are enhancements there that the town wants specific to that new school or schools, they should be coming to the plate with some dollars to get that done.

The other thing I wanted to mention here, in terms of capital acquisition, is the three new pieces of equipment for Fort Smith and for Aurora College. I’m just wondering: why is it that we’re buying new pieces of equipment for the college? Wouldn’t we at least look at second-hand equipment, Mr. Chairman? Why does it have to be new?

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Minister Miltenberger.

Mr. Chairman, they already have fairly antiquated equipment. There’s a need and benefit to having the students learning on equipment that probably industry is going to use. Industry keeps their equipment much more updated and modern than the college can afford. But if the Member wishes more detail, I’d ask the Minister of Education if he could provide more detail. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Mr. Lafferty.

Mahsi, Mr. Chair. Certainly, the Minister is correct about those. Of the equipment that we have currently, some are over 20 years old, and some are breaking down on us. Also, it’s not compatible for training those individuals and going out to a mine site, because they have high tech, more modern equipment. We have an older version. That was the purpose of replacing that equipment. We need to continue with delivering the training program at the campus. If we

don’t invest in this equipment, it will be impossible to have the course delivered. Mahsi.

I thank both Ministers for that. You know, when we’re talking about training folks for jobs in the mining industry here in the Northwest Territories, I wonder if any thought was given to approaching industry to try to get them to help with the capital purchase of this equipment so our people could get trained. Did any discussion take place with industry to help offset some of these costs for these three new pieces of equipment?